Historic, Archive Document Do not assume content reflects current scientific knowledge, policies, or practices. MAIN REPORT\ I ) OUACHITA RIVER BASIN STUDY Reserve aTC4?5 r .08U5 ARKANSAS AND LOUISIANA v ;Wm UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ! > (V F .W ECONOMICS, STATISTICS, AND COOPERATIVES SERVICE V, FOREST SERVICE . \ AND SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE I AB-33 Bookplate <!-«*) NATIONAL MAIN REPORT o OUACHITA RIVER BASIN o U.S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURAL! RATIONAL AGRICULTURAL LIBRARY her Prepared by: mmvrnmm*, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE >•0 Soil Conservation Service <o Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service o Forest Service D Sponsored by: Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Commission Louisiana State Soil and Water Conservation Committee Louisiana Office of Public Works Alexandria, Louisiana January 1980 * if 1 74?999 OUACHITA RIVER BASIN STUDY Arkansas and Louisiana TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF REPORT E-l PREFACE PREFACE P-1 PROBLEMS AND CONCERNS INTRODUCTION 1-1 SUMMARY OF STUDY CONCERNS 1-1 FLOODING AND IMPAIRED DRAINAGE 1-5 WATER SUPPLY AND STORAGE 1-8 FOREST RESOURCES 1-8 RECREATION 1-9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND ECOSYSTEMS 1-9 AREAS OF NATURAL BEAUTY 1-12 CULTURAL RESOURCES 1-13 LAND AND WATER QUALITY 1-14 RECOMMENDED PLAN INTRODUCTION II-l PLAN ELEMENTS II- PLAN EFFECTS 1 1 -7 SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTS - BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE EFFECTS II-8 RELATIONSHIP TO LAND USE, PLANS, POLICIES, AND CONTROLS IN THE BASIN 11-13 SHORT-TERM VS. LONG-TERM USE OF RESOURCES 11-13 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS 11-15 CHANGED RESOURCE USE 11-15 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SUMMARY 11-17 COMPARISON WITH OTHER ALTERNATIVES 11-18 EARLY-ACTION USDA PROGRAM 11-20 OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION INTRODUCTION III-l OPPORTUNITIES FOR USDA PROGRAMS III-l OPPORTUNITIES FOR NON-USDA PROGRAMS III-9 1 1 4 Table of Contents (Continued) ALTERNATIVE PLANS INTRODUCTION IV- FUTURE WITHOUT PLAN ALTERNATIVE IV- ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE IV-3 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ALTERNATIVE IV-9 EFFECTIVENESS OF ALTERNATIVE PLANS IV- 16 APPENDIX N umb e r TABLES E.l Subbasins of the Study Area E-3 E.2 Benefits and Costs of Recommended Plan E-6 E.3 Effects of Recommended Plan E-8 1.1 Summary of Net Needs By Concerns for 1970, 1990, 2020 1-1 II. 1 Effects of Recommended Plan 11-12 11. 2 Established Conservation Land Treatment Measures 1 1 - 1 11. 3 Effects of Recommended Plan Compared with Effects of Selected Alternatives 11-21 11. 4 Comparison of Average Annual Benefits and Costs of Recommended Plan and Selected Alternatives 11-21 111.1 Estimated Cost of Implementing Recommended Plan and Annual OM&R Costs 1 1 1 - 2 111. 2 Estimated Cost of Implementing USDA Program .... 1 1 1 — 8 IV. 1 Summary of Plan Elements for each Alternative IV-2 IV. 2 Proposed Early-Action Measures of ED Alternative IV-4 IV. 3 Estimated Costs of ED Alternative IV-6 IV. 4 Average Annual Monetary Benefits of ED Alternative IV-6 IV. 5 Elements and Costs of P.L.-566 and RC&D Projects Under ED Alternative . IV-7 IV. 6 Proposed Early-Action Measures of EQ Alternative . IV-10 IV. 7 Estimated Costs of EQ Alternative IV-12 2 f Table of Contents (Continued) IV. 8 Average Annual Monetary Benefits of EQ Alternative IV-12 IV. 9 Elements and Cost of P.L.-566 and RC&D Projects Under EQ Alternative IV-13 IV. 10 Effectiveness of ED and EQ Alternatives and . Recommended Plan IV-17 FIGURES 11.1 Map of Early-Action U.S.D.A. Watershed Projects . 11-22 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The ever-increasing demands of society and an expanding population results in heavy competition for the use of land and water resources. Previous general river basin studies indicated this was creating a need for the conservation, orderly development and utilization of land and water resources in the Ouachita River Basin. Consequently the states of Arkansas and Louisiana jointly determined further, more detailed study was needed. It was determined the study would consist of an appraisal of the adequacy of existing resources meeting current needs, the identification of problems and concerns, future trends, recommendations for solutions to land and water resource problems, and guidelines for future development of these resources. AUTHORITY FOR THE STUDY AND SPONSORS Authority for this study is contained in Section 6 of Public Law 566 as amended. Sponsors of the study are the Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Commission; the Louisiana State Soil and Water Conservation Committee; and the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, Office of Public Works. AGENCIES PARTICIPATING Agencies conducting the study include the Soil Conservation Service, the Forest Service, and the Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service all of which are part of the U. S. Department of Agriculture with the SCS being the lead agency. The sponsoring agencies provided coordination to accomplish the study in their respective states. Federal cooperating agencies included the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers; the U. S. Geological Survey; the Bureau of Mines; the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation the Environmental Protection Agency; the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service; the National Weather Service; the U. S. Public Health Service; and the Federal Power Commission. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Public meetings were held in Louisiana and Arkansas to inform the public of the study and obtain their views on problems, concerns, and desires regarding land and water resources. In addition to those attending meetings, local officials and interested citizens were sent questionnaires to identify specific problems and concerns. Federal, state, and local agencies provided input into the study through work groups and other means. Near the end of the study the sponsors held a public meeting for the purpose of presenting alternatives developed during the study and obtain their views and desires on what should constitute a Basin plan from the alternatives presented. EXPECTED USE OF THE STUDY This study is intended to provide direction in future land and water resources development planning in the Ouachita River Basin by providing information on existing resources, resource limitations, future need and demands, and recommendations for alleviating problems, meeting needs, and the extent to which assistance can be provided under USDA programs. • It would also indicate remaining needs and concerns that would require solutions under state and local programs. DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA The study area includes the entire Ouachita River Basin within the Lower Mississippi Water Resource Region and a portion of the Red River Basin in Rapides and Avoyelles Parishes. This covers about 25,900 square miles in the southern half of Arkansas and the northeast quadrant of Louisiana. The Ouachita River originates in the Ouachita Mountains of west central Arkansas and outlets into the Black River in central Louisiana, which in turn empties into the Red River in Avoyelles Parish in east central Louisiana. The drainage area consists of approximately 3,500 square miles of the Ouachita Mountains in Arkansas; 15,000 square miles of hilly uplands in Arkansas and Louisiana; and 7,400 square miles of flat, alluvial areas in Arkansas and Louisiana. See table E.l for the Basin area by subbasins and the acreage of each. PROBLEMS AND CONCERNS Problems and concerns related to land and water resources within the Ouachita River Basin were identified by the study. Approximately 25 percent of the Basin, or 4,158,000 acres, are subject to flooding and impaired drainage. This causes significant economic losses and damages to agriculture on 1,574,000 acres and to urban areas covering about 1000 acres. The remaining 2,583,000 acres are in forest land where it is not a tangible problem. Of the 1,575,000 acres of problem area, 315,000 acres of cropland and pasture and 1000 acres of urban land are in the upland areas where only flooding is a problem. The remaining 1,259,000 acres are cropland and pasture in the flatland areas where flooding and impaired drainage are an inseparable problem. Under existing conditions, losses and damages average $34,122,000, per year. This includes $29,186,000 of agricultural losses; $227,000- of urban damages; $1,607,000 to roads, bridges, railroads and miscellaneous items; and $3,102,000 of indirect damages. It is estimated that total annual losses will increase to $58,127,000 by 1990 and to $82,714,000 by 2020 . y This does not include damages to Monroe and West Monroe which is under study by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. £-2 Table E.l - Subbasins of the Study Area Ouachita River Basin Subbasin State Acreage Little Missouri Arkansas 1,332,200 Saline River Arkansas 1,853,100 Ouachita River Arkansas and 4,486,200 (Upper reaches) Louisiana Bayou Bartholomew Arkansas and 991,300 Louisiana Boeuf River Arkansas and 1,568,500 Louisiana Cornie Bayou Arkansas and 573,200 Louisiana Bayou Macon Arkansas and 363,700 Louisiana Boeuf River and Bayou Bartholomew Louisiana 157,500 Boeuf River, Tensas River and Bayou Macon Louisiana 196,000 Bayou Macon and Boeuf River Louisiana 248,900 Bayou Macon and Tensas River Louisiana 328,000 Tensas River Louisiana 645,300 Bayou D'Arbonne Louisiana 738,500 Dugdemona River Louisiana 591,700 Castor Creek Louisiana 599,100 Little River Louisiana 677,000 Red River Tributaries Louisiana 625,600 Bayou Cocodrie Louisiana 379,200 Batture Land 221,000 TOTAL ACRES 16,576,000 (Square Miles = 25,900) £-3 . Other problems and concerns include indicated increased needs of 114 mgd by 1990 and 273 mgd by 2020 for agricultural water supply. The existing need for an additional development of 345,000 acres of water surface for fishing, boating, and skiing is expected to increase about 20 percent by 1990.